Posted
by
samzenpuson Thursday February 28, 2008 @02:13AM
from the lost-cause dept.

Beagle writes "The science of evolution is often misunderstood by the public and a session at the recent AAAS meeting in Boston covered three frequently misapprehended topics in evolutionary history, the Cambrian explosion, origin of tetrapods, and evolution of human ancestors, as well as the origin of life. The final speaker, Martin Storksdieck of the Institute for Learning Innovation, covered how to communicate the data to a public that 'has such a hard time accepting what science is discovering.' His view: 'while most of the attention has focused on childhood education, we really should be going after the parents. Everyone is a lifelong learner, Storksdieck said, but once people leave school, that learning becomes a voluntary matter that's largely driven by individual taste.'"

Hmmmm, I intended to disagree with you and mock you, but now that I think about it realize I you were actually sort of right. ID is indeed extremely controversial exactly because of the implication of it not having any evidence.

"Not reading the summary" is the new "Not reading TFA"./. shall have crossed the event horizon when people no longer even read the headline, and just offer random noise disguised as comments.
Oh, wait...

He does it because he's bored. See, people liked Chrono Trigger, but it was pretty easy. So they came up with the "wood sword" challenge, where you have to beat the game without buying a new weapon for Chrono. FF9 had a popular challenge where you had to beat it without leveling up. I'm sure FF7 has a "no materia" challenge. Any divinity can make a kick-ass universe if they have the cheat codes, says God. But it takes a true 1337dude to do it if you only allow yourself to skew random events;) If you change "Is only able to alter reality indirectly" with "Only feels like altering reality indirectly" the objections disappear. God works in mysterious ways, what place does anybody have to question His choice to not meddle directly? In summary, God does it for the lulz.

Please note that it was not 'fanatics' who created nuclear weapons. It was 'rationalists'. As to the relative danger of either group, well, without rationalists creating the nuclear bombs in the first place, you'd not have to worry about 'fanatics' detonating them. I would note, however, that the ONLY people to have ever used nuclear weapons "in the field" were in the US government, and that they had no religious imperative for their use. Also note that those who have murdered the largest numbers of people in history - Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Alexander the Great, Ghengis Khan - all were either non-religious or anti-religious. So the scoreboard shows that you have more to fear from non-religious types than religious ones, statistically speaking. In fact, of the 20 worst losses of human life in history, only ONE had anything to do with religion, and I believe it is either 19th or 20th on the list.